Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act allows compounding of offences under Section 138 at any stage of the proceedings, including after conviction is affirmed and revision is dismissed, as it possesses a non-obstante clause that overrides the Code of Criminal Procedure.

JUDGMENT :

Sanjeev Kumar Sharma, J.

[1] Heard Mr. B. Deka, the learned counsel for the petitioner/appellant. Also heard Mr. R.J. Baruah, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam as well as Mr. U. Dutta, the learned counsel for the respondent No. 2.

[2] This is an application under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India, whereby the petitioner seeks interference with the impugned judgment and order dated 07.07.2017, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTC) No. 3, Kamrup (Metro) in Criminal Appeal No. 200 of 2013, which had affirmed the judgment and order dated 15.10.2013, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kamrup (Metro) at Guwahati in C.R. No. 1940 of 2008.

[3] By the said judgment, the petitioner was convicted of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter 'the Act') and sentenced to undergo SI for two months and to pay a compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only), in default, SI for another one month.

[4] The ground on which the present criminal petition invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this court under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been preferred is on account of a settlement said to have been arrived at between the parties.

[5] It is submitted that a Criminal Revision Petition No. 452 of 2017, was preferred by the present petitioner which was admitted, subject to deposit of Rs. 1,50,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Fifty Thousand only) by the petitioner, which was done by the petitioner and the said amount was released to the complainant/respondent No.2. Earlier the petitioner had paid an amount of Rs. 99,000/- (Rupees Ninety Thousand only) out of the cheque amount of Rs. 2,50,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Fifty Thousand only) on 19.09.2008 by cheque No. 628281 dated 16.09.2008, which was during the course of the trial.

[6] During the pendency of the instant criminal petition, a joint affidavit has been submitted by the petitioner and respondent No. 2 stating that the matter of payment has been settled between the parties by executing a Settlement Agreement dated 16.06.2026, in terms of which the parties have agreed to settle for a total amount of Rs. 4,50,000/-(Rupees Four Lakhs Fifty Thousand only). It is stated that in order to settle all the disputes between the parties, the second party, i.e., the petitioner herein offered a settlement in full and final against the cheque amount as well as the compensation amount in dispute to pay an amount of Rs. 4,50,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Fifty Thousand only) which is termed as the settlement amount. As per the terms of the aforesaid agreement, this amount of Rs. 4,50,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Fifty Thousand only) is in addition to the amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Fifty Thousand only) already paid by the second party/ petitioner at the time of the admission of Criminal Revision Petition No. 452 of 2017. It is also stated that the aforesaid amount has already been paid by the petitioner to the respondent No. 2. Accordingly, it is submitted that the offence may be compounded keeping in view the provisions of Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

[7] The question that naturally arises is whether the High Court in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 can compound an offence under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 in terms of Section 147 of the said Act after the original conviction and sentence has been affirmed in appeal and,